Hawk-Eye in, Hot Spot out for Sri Lanka series

Technology's place in reviewing the decisions of umpires became murkier still as it was confirmed Sri Lanka's limited-overs and Test series against Australia will employ a version of the DRS that utilises Hawk-Eye technology but not Hot Spot.

This arrangement, brought about by a combination of the two boards' acceptance of ball-tracking technology and the unavailability of Hot Spot cameras for the series in Sri Lanka, is almost completely the inverse of the configuration used by England and India in their concurrent Test series.

India's acceptance of Hot Spot but not ball-tracking or pitch-mapping has meant that lbw appeals cannot be referred during the series, while caught behinds and close catches are more thoroughly scrutinised.

The Sri Lankan board's position on the use of technology in the series has been fluid, pending costs and hardware availability, and the final implementation of the system means that lbw decisions will be the most keenly observed.

Final confirmation of the use of one technology but not the other arrived after the match referee Javagal Srinath's pre-series meeting with the two captains, Tillakaratne Dilshan and Michael Clarke. Srinath will preside over the limited-overs matches, in which each team is granted one unsuccessful decision review per innings, before Chris Broad takes over for the Tests, where two unsuccessful reviews per innings are permitted.

The DRS and its inconsistent use by various countries will continue during the Australian summer. New Zealand are scheduled to play two Tests against the hosts and will agree to the employment of all available technology for the series, before India's arrival will mean the removal of lbw reviews and ball-tracking.

Elsewhere the one-off Test between Zimbabwe and Bangladesh in Harare did not employ the DRS for reasons of cost, a problem that will persist so long as the technology is funded by broadcasters and host boards without recourse to a central fund or sponsorship.

Sri Lanka has always supported the games governing body's decisions. They were the first to accept UDRS. Hats off to you SL & AUS for accepting UDRS to get more fair decisions.

POSTED BY
Dashgar
on | August 12, 2011, 2:08 GMT

I really hope this UDRS will be gone soon, it creates so much more trouble than it's worth, and when it's not there like in the recent Zim vs Bang test there were no problems at all.

POSTED BY
on | August 12, 2011, 2:07 GMT

@jonesy2, your comment lacks sufficient reason to justify its own claims. To call the hot Spot "completely inaccurate and unreliable" constitutes a severe lack of critical thinking ability. Simply because a sound registers in a small percentage of incidents where no spot is visible hardly goes a far enough distance for the system to be rendered as you deduce. It simply shows that there is no perfect system, and that this is the closest one could possibly get at this point to a robust system that can be used to reduce bad decisions. If it is "completely inaccurate and unreliable" as you claim, then compared to what would it be completely inaccurate and unreliable? If you have a better idea, let's see it. If not, then you are not providing a solution, and therefore should have offered your silence on the matter.

POSTED BY
on | August 11, 2011, 17:57 GMT

I hate to say it, but I agree with India. The only time an LBW should be reviewed is when a batsman has hit it, which hotspot reveals. Speculative reviews by batsman in the hope that the ball is missing the stumps really do undermine the on field umpires and are a blight on the modern game. And if an umpire misses an obviously plumb LBW, I don't think you need hawkeye to see that.

POSTED BY
VEXXZ
on | August 11, 2011, 10:27 GMT

Some CAMERAS cannot be used for some games and some Countries . You must have a POLICY across the board .When the West Indies were going STRONG with the Fast Bowlers All every one came together and took away their strength by interducing the 2 bouncer rule per over .
ICC, lets have DSR across the board once and for all . PERIOD.

POSTED BY
jonesy2
on | August 11, 2011, 8:42 GMT

good, hot spot is completely inaccurate and unreliable, eg ian bell being out catch behind in the ashes but surviving, thats just one example.

POSTED BY
nssmac
on | August 11, 2011, 8:07 GMT

Once again 2 views about DRS, I think ICC should be strict enough to implement the rules if they have too. I Just don't understand why BCCI is completely against of using the system. Sri Lanka should be appreciated for the supporting the system. I just give fair decisions to both the playing teams. May God Give Brains for the teams against using the Complete UDRS systems.

POSTED BY
mensan
on | August 11, 2011, 8:04 GMT

Australia must insist use of full UDRS for India home series later this year. If India refuses, they should cancel their tour and invite Pakistan instead.

POSTED BY
on | August 11, 2011, 7:45 GMT

Techincally , It isn't the same form of Cricket played all over thw World !

POSTED BY
on | August 11, 2011, 7:41 GMT

I hate to say it, but I agree with India. The only time an LBW should be reviewed is when a batsman has hit it, which hotspot reveals. Speculative reviews by batsman in the hope that the ball is missing the stumps really do undermine the on field umpires and are a blight on the modern game. And if an umpire misses an obviously plumb LBW, I don't think you need hawkeye to see that.

POSTED BY
Sri1967
on | August 12, 2011, 15:25 GMT

Sri Lanka has always supported the games governing body's decisions. They were the first to accept UDRS. Hats off to you SL & AUS for accepting UDRS to get more fair decisions.

POSTED BY
Dashgar
on | August 12, 2011, 2:08 GMT

I really hope this UDRS will be gone soon, it creates so much more trouble than it's worth, and when it's not there like in the recent Zim vs Bang test there were no problems at all.

POSTED BY
on | August 12, 2011, 2:07 GMT

@jonesy2, your comment lacks sufficient reason to justify its own claims. To call the hot Spot "completely inaccurate and unreliable" constitutes a severe lack of critical thinking ability. Simply because a sound registers in a small percentage of incidents where no spot is visible hardly goes a far enough distance for the system to be rendered as you deduce. It simply shows that there is no perfect system, and that this is the closest one could possibly get at this point to a robust system that can be used to reduce bad decisions. If it is "completely inaccurate and unreliable" as you claim, then compared to what would it be completely inaccurate and unreliable? If you have a better idea, let's see it. If not, then you are not providing a solution, and therefore should have offered your silence on the matter.

POSTED BY
on | August 11, 2011, 17:57 GMT

I hate to say it, but I agree with India. The only time an LBW should be reviewed is when a batsman has hit it, which hotspot reveals. Speculative reviews by batsman in the hope that the ball is missing the stumps really do undermine the on field umpires and are a blight on the modern game. And if an umpire misses an obviously plumb LBW, I don't think you need hawkeye to see that.

POSTED BY
VEXXZ
on | August 11, 2011, 10:27 GMT

Some CAMERAS cannot be used for some games and some Countries . You must have a POLICY across the board .When the West Indies were going STRONG with the Fast Bowlers All every one came together and took away their strength by interducing the 2 bouncer rule per over .
ICC, lets have DSR across the board once and for all . PERIOD.

POSTED BY
jonesy2
on | August 11, 2011, 8:42 GMT

good, hot spot is completely inaccurate and unreliable, eg ian bell being out catch behind in the ashes but surviving, thats just one example.

POSTED BY
nssmac
on | August 11, 2011, 8:07 GMT

Once again 2 views about DRS, I think ICC should be strict enough to implement the rules if they have too. I Just don't understand why BCCI is completely against of using the system. Sri Lanka should be appreciated for the supporting the system. I just give fair decisions to both the playing teams. May God Give Brains for the teams against using the Complete UDRS systems.

POSTED BY
mensan
on | August 11, 2011, 8:04 GMT

Australia must insist use of full UDRS for India home series later this year. If India refuses, they should cancel their tour and invite Pakistan instead.

POSTED BY
on | August 11, 2011, 7:45 GMT

Techincally , It isn't the same form of Cricket played all over thw World !

POSTED BY
on | August 11, 2011, 7:41 GMT

I hate to say it, but I agree with India. The only time an LBW should be reviewed is when a batsman has hit it, which hotspot reveals. Speculative reviews by batsman in the hope that the ball is missing the stumps really do undermine the on field umpires and are a blight on the modern game. And if an umpire misses an obviously plumb LBW, I don't think you need hawkeye to see that.

POSTED BY
zingzangspillip
on | August 11, 2011, 3:06 GMT

This is absolutely ridiculous. We now have two different versions of the DRS operating at the same time in different series. If the ICC is serious about using technology, then it *must* take responsibility for the providing of the required hardware.

POSTED BY
cricket_for_all
on | August 11, 2011, 0:03 GMT

I am really proud of both teams for accepting whatever means they have as an UDRS to get more fair decisions.

POSTED BY
Chinny
on | August 10, 2011, 22:58 GMT

It's a win win situation, the Sri Lankan board now has a quality reason to save some money...

POSTED BY
RandyOZ
on | August 10, 2011, 22:51 GMT

ICC - lift your game please

POSTED BY
randikaayya
on | August 10, 2011, 19:06 GMT

Its a shame that all available hot-spot cameras are beign deployed in England at present. Would have been great to use all technology tools in this series. ICC should make some arrangement to fascilitate two simultaneous tours happening with full DRS. However using all available technology is a commendable decision by both boards. Its a shame to think that two Indian batters found to their peril today that not walking after edging could lead them to disrepute as Hot-spot detected they nicked it with relative ease!

POSTED BY
on | August 10, 2011, 18:04 GMT

Bat Pad... keep that in mind be4 reading further

i remember reading on cricinfo only sometime be4 the worldcup that the cameras that provide the hotspot view are provided by the australians. Which are mainly used by the navy/army or some security agency here in australia..

POSTED BY
rhubarbmuncher
on | August 10, 2011, 11:56 GMT

The issue with the cameras is that they are very high-tech and expensive, and most importantly of military interest. They are controlled exports, and cannot be allowed out of the country except under very controlled conditions, with immediate return required. The ICC is not completely in control of availability of the hot-spot cameras.

The inconsistent deployment of DRS is a shambles. Leadership - and funding - from the ICC required here.

POSTED BY
chandau
on | August 10, 2011, 8:32 GMT

What a farce. series being played on 3 different conditions. ICC is so so stupid and to stingy.

POSTED BY
on | August 10, 2011, 8:09 GMT

Since the unavailability of the Hot Spot cameras, it is better at least use the available Hawk-Eye technology. Thumbs up for both boards & both captains. If ICC can make any issue for the availability of the Hot-Spot cameras in all events with the company which provides the cameras, It will be better.
Thumbs up for both teams!!!

POSTED BY
Imran_Panjwani
on | August 10, 2011, 7:48 GMT

That's the good decision by 2 boards that LBWs are the main concern for the teams Indian Board should learn from Srilankan Board that LBWs are vital in test cricket and we hopefully that indian board must use hawkeye and ball tracking technology in future series

POSTED BY
on | August 10, 2011, 7:33 GMT

I think ICC should make some standards for these technologies. Several countries have been playing their own versions of UDRS. ICC should sponsor the countries which can not afford the money for UDRS. on the other hand I suspect accuracy of hot spot in countries like Sri Lanka. because the temparature difference is very low. I think using these technologies will improve the standard of the game and hence improve the sportsmanship.

POSTED BY
Shafi79
on | August 10, 2011, 7:31 GMT

Fair enough if the two teams involved have agreed.

However we really need to stop bringing up India and their insistence on not using hawk eye - they are entitled to thier opinion no matter how silly or egoistic the rest of us think it is, and we all had the chance to vote on it during the ICC conference and all of our boards decided to bend over for the BCCI. so we need to zip it and get on with it.

POSTED BY
manojettedi
on | August 10, 2011, 7:28 GMT

Australian board is foolish. No hotspot but hawkeye??? What were they thinking. haven't they given a thought to the bat pad catches? They are playing in Sri lanka where the close in catchers and spinners come in to play big time. hence the use of hotspot is more appropriate than the hawkeye.

POSTED BY
on | August 10, 2011, 7:23 GMT

huhh......dey r not using d technology jst b'coz of unavailability of hardware...what is dis...some kindaa school cricket...???..it's simple SL board don't want to use them

No featured comments at the moment.

POSTED BY
on | August 10, 2011, 7:23 GMT

huhh......dey r not using d technology jst b'coz of unavailability of hardware...what is dis...some kindaa school cricket...???..it's simple SL board don't want to use them

POSTED BY
manojettedi
on | August 10, 2011, 7:28 GMT

Australian board is foolish. No hotspot but hawkeye??? What were they thinking. haven't they given a thought to the bat pad catches? They are playing in Sri lanka where the close in catchers and spinners come in to play big time. hence the use of hotspot is more appropriate than the hawkeye.

POSTED BY
Shafi79
on | August 10, 2011, 7:31 GMT

Fair enough if the two teams involved have agreed.

However we really need to stop bringing up India and their insistence on not using hawk eye - they are entitled to thier opinion no matter how silly or egoistic the rest of us think it is, and we all had the chance to vote on it during the ICC conference and all of our boards decided to bend over for the BCCI. so we need to zip it and get on with it.

POSTED BY
on | August 10, 2011, 7:33 GMT

I think ICC should make some standards for these technologies. Several countries have been playing their own versions of UDRS. ICC should sponsor the countries which can not afford the money for UDRS. on the other hand I suspect accuracy of hot spot in countries like Sri Lanka. because the temparature difference is very low. I think using these technologies will improve the standard of the game and hence improve the sportsmanship.

POSTED BY
Imran_Panjwani
on | August 10, 2011, 7:48 GMT

That's the good decision by 2 boards that LBWs are the main concern for the teams Indian Board should learn from Srilankan Board that LBWs are vital in test cricket and we hopefully that indian board must use hawkeye and ball tracking technology in future series

POSTED BY
on | August 10, 2011, 8:09 GMT

Since the unavailability of the Hot Spot cameras, it is better at least use the available Hawk-Eye technology. Thumbs up for both boards & both captains. If ICC can make any issue for the availability of the Hot-Spot cameras in all events with the company which provides the cameras, It will be better.
Thumbs up for both teams!!!

POSTED BY
chandau
on | August 10, 2011, 8:32 GMT

What a farce. series being played on 3 different conditions. ICC is so so stupid and to stingy.

POSTED BY
pragmatist
on | August 10, 2011, 8:46 GMT

The inconsistent deployment of DRS is a shambles. Leadership - and funding - from the ICC required here.

The issue with the cameras is that they are very high-tech and expensive, and most importantly of military interest. They are controlled exports, and cannot be allowed out of the country except under very controlled conditions, with immediate return required. The ICC is not completely in control of availability of the hot-spot cameras.